Avatar, Has Sci-fi Found Its Heaven's Gate?

brumgrunt writes "Den Of Geek wonders if James Cameron's Avatar is heading for a fall, and if it will even be a science fiction film, off the back of the previews shown last week. It writes: 'It seems in Avatar that all this gee-whiz science is merely there to draw the "old crowd" in and provide some kind of rationale for a brightly-coloured fantasy-world which reflects the most emetic of the artwork plastered over teenage girls' MySpace pages.'"

Comments

Story?

[Brian Gordon]

Wait, what is this story? Looks like some editorial about how Avatar won't be good.

Re:Story?

[Anonymous Cowar]

"I complain on forums about video games that I haven't even played!"

In other news, the internet, James Cameron, and the world at large carries on despite the ramblings of some poor little guy who got beaten in middle school by a crowd of little girls wielding Lisa Frank binders.

OR...

[192939495969798999]

Or, Avatar will completely whip ass and this and all other negative critiques will be laughed at and/or forgotten.

Re:OR...

[Richard_at_work]

Or, more likely, some people will rave about it, some people will rant about it, and the vast majority will just get some entertainment from it and never think twice. I don't really get why this film is being championed on Slashdot - its a film, nothing more. Just because it has a scifi orientated plot doesn't make it something to hold up and worship, there are plenty of decent scifi films out there.

Only On Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Where District 9 is already as great as Star Wars and a movie that's not even out sucks.

Re:Only On Slashdot

[eviloverlordx]

Where District 9 is already as great as Star Wars and a movie that's not even out sucks.

And Joss is actually thought of as a creative genius.

Re:Only On Slashdot

[sexconker]

Joss Whedon is a derivative hack who can't help be defile every thing he touches with some sort of adolescent fantasy involving shitty, super-powered, little girls. Then his shows get canceled and the fucker throws a tantrum a 7 year old would envy, killing off all the likable characters and pile driving what little story there was face first into the fucking ground.

Re:Only On Slashdot

[commodore64_love]

>>>Joss Whedon is a derivative hack who can't help be defile every thing he touches with some sort of adolescent fantasy involving shitty, super-powered, little girls.
>>>

Now now. Whedon's not that bad. First-off they're not little girls - they're young women. Second produced two excellent shows (Buffy, Angel), a decent show (Firefly), and a mediocre show (Dollhouse). That's better than a lot of his colleagues. Gene Roddenberry did no better (one hit wonder) and neither did J.Michael Straczynski (another one-hitter) or Michael Pillar (DS9 and BSG). It's simply not possible to make EVERY show a hit. Whedon has no reason to feel shame.

I have noticed though that Whedon seems to have a foot fetish.
He spends a lot of time focusing his camera on women's feet.
Well nobody's perfect. ;-)

Re:Only On Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

That's like saying that the only reason YOU don't have sex with little girls is because you would be burned at the stake, if you tried it. There's probably the same amount of evidence.

My nominee for

[idontgno]

"Most Snarky Use of the Word 'Emetic'"

And, may I add, perfectly appropriate and accurate, when used in reference to a huge proportion of the great wasteland that is MySpace.

Let me get this straight ...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're basing all of this on a *TEASER TRAILER*?

Re:All the whiners have is a teaser trailer

[Anonymous Coward]

This comment sums this whole story/thread more than succinctly. Well played Sir.

Puhlease!

[Recovering Hater]

In Avatar, mankind has the ability to cross the voids of space in an effort to mine a mineral rich alien world. Bring these minerals back for refinemant and use. We have the ability to implant a human mind into an alien avatar body that we have ourselves created and control that persons new avatar body. And yet we can't repair a paralyzed human body? Fail.

Re:Puhlease!

[Richard_at_work]

Not all technological advancement happens at a steady, conformal pace - we can send probes to other worlds, put men in space, travel across the face of the earth in hours and yet we still rely on physicians making judgement calls about diagnoses?

We can investigate the fundamentals of the universe, the big bang and quantum physics, but we are yet to fully understand every step in the process of photosynthesis - one of the most widely used processes in life on this planet.

Just two examples.

Re:Puhlease!

[Animaether]

Why is that strange?

There are plenty of examples in real life now where it is easier to create something from anew than to repair it. Easier/cheaper.

Let's take an extreme example... an 'I' beam used in construction. We can stamp those out by the hundreds, easy-peasy. But the moment an x-ray detects a crack in one, do we repair it? Heck no - it's way more difficult, and expensive, to repair that than it is to simply make a new 'I' beam.

Perhaps a medical example is in order... see that story on the front page a bit further down about growing a tooth in a rat? Everybody who has heard of construction of a new tooth from scratch that is identical to a grown tooth, raise your hand. No? Nobody? Yet a completely new tooth was grown by scientists already.

Just because mankind would have the ability to grow entirely new bodies (much like you could grow a clone, I daresay), doesn't mean you should assume they could just fix any existing bodies' ailments.

Re:Puhlease!

[jollyreaper]

Not all technological advancement happens at a steady, conformal pace - we can send probes to other worlds, put men in space, travel across the face of the earth in hours and yet we still rely on physicians making judgement calls about diagnoses?

We can investigate the fundamentals of the universe, the big bang and quantum physics, but we are yet to fully understand every step in the process of photosynthesis - one of the most widely used processes in life on this planet.

Yeah, but being able to understand genetics enough to create an avatar and remote link a mind to it seems to imply a very strong understanding of biology. The level of ridiculousness here would be like saying "Ok, so they have cyborgs in this universe, ones capable of passing for human, the AI's are very advanced, yet they still have people manually flying aircraft and driving vehicles, not just out of a sense of nostalgia but because it can't be done...Wait a sec!"

People were complaining about Firefly's wild west aspect with office towers and spaceships on one planet and nothing but horses and six-shooters on another. Well, we do have some pretty wild differences on this planet. Just look at the range of human technology depicted in District 9, cell phones in shanty towns. I could make a good argument that a farmer who has no certain access to outside resources would prefer an ox to a tractor since an ox is easier to fuel, two oxen can make more oxen, etc. A tractor could represent a recurring expense he cannot afford. And then to really blow your mind, he could use a solar-powered laptop with GPS to plot the lay of his fields. Hey, the laptop works for a long time if you don't break it and the sun's free...

Re:Puhlease!

[vertinox]

And yet we can't repair a paralyzed human body? Fail.

I think that part of plot line is just dumb simply because you can come up with a thousand reasons why someone wouldn't want to use their real body.

I mean your chance of dying in an accident goes to near zero once you stop going outdoors and not to mention its just more efficient to travel around.

But to say people only use avatar's because they are paralyzed is silly. People will do it because they want to, not because they have to.

Re:Avatar first-impression:

[Anonymous Cowar]

>third-rate fantasy masturbatory session for furries and other WoW-playing losers.

Err, you do know youre posting on slashdot, right?

That's why he posted AC.

Re:Avatar first-impression:

[A. B3ttik]

Avatar: FernGully with Mechs.

Sexist bastard. :P

[girlintraining]

"...which reflects the most emetic of the artwork plastered over teenage girls' MySpace pages"

Ever since Twilight came out and fangirling became mainstream, the response by so many boys has been dismissive and derisive. But in a room full of boys talking about World of Warcraft nobody flinches. It's a double standard.

male chauvanism?

[Lexible]

most emetic of the artwork plastered over teenage girls' MySpace pages

sure... while teenage boys' fantasies get exalted into "real sci-fi"? (like, say the recent star trek movie?) mayhap den of geek should adjust his testosterone obsession by reading ursula le guin, c. j. cherryh, octavia butler, dorris lessing, joanna rush, emma bull, oh and heck, anne mccaffrey. i can't help but imagine that it would nicely leaven the quality of questions about sci-fi he poses.

Re:Could Pixar do better than James Cameron?

[flitty]

Most of their profits are realized through merchandizing. . . The most Avatar can hope for is some blacklight posters sold at Spencers.

Strange. When I see halo-Warthog type vehicles, dropships, and tall blue aliens, the first thing that comes to my mind is how much this movie was built to be made into toys.

Three words:

[unfortunateson]

James F*cking Cameron

Has he let us down up until now? Aliens, Terminator, T2, Abyss (not kick-ass amazing, but still a good flick), True Lies... you have to go back to Pirhana to get a stinker, and he was still cutting his chops, and he didn't write it.

And I don't know what trailer the critic watched, but I'm with Sam Worthington: "This is *GREAT*"

Re:Three words:

[fahrbot-bot]

Has he let us down up until now?

One word: Titanic

Sure, it made a metric f*ckload of money and women around the world cried, but it was a crap story. In the shadow of 1500 people dying needlessly in the freezing waters of the North Atlantic as a result of corporate short-sightedness and greed and societal dispassion for the poor working-class, we get some bullshit "love story" with sappy, contrived prose. Just thinking about final dialog between Rose and Dawson - while hundreds drowned and froze - still makes me gag. Talk about emetic. Don't get me started on the lame present-day story of the search for the diamond, that Rose has secretly kept all these years and simply tosses back into the ocean at the end.

I'm sure a LOT of people will disagree with my opinion, but I stand by it. The movie Titanic was complete crap and a disservice to the tragedy and loss of life that occurred.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go throw up...

Re:Three words:

[dbcad7]

Not to defend the movie, that to me wasn't "all that", but when telling the story of any large tragedy it does help people to understand the significance of an event when you can focus on the story of a few who went through it.. I think Titanic failed a bit in that, by too narrowly focusing on two people.. If you compare that with Saving Private Ryan, which is the same idea but done much better and with more characters to care about, then the technique of telling a story within a large event is acceptable and does not diminish the tragedy.. Both of these movies are after all, not documentaries.

Re:Based off the director's own words...

[MaXintosh]

Touché.

RedGreen said it best,
Edgar Montrose: That native actor in Dances With Wolves was really good, they shoulda given him the Oscar.
:)

cameron has been here before

[circletimessquare]

http://www.avclub.com/articles/inventory-eight-surefire-fiascoes-that-unexpectedl,1532/

titanic was way over budget and plenty in hollywood were sharpening the knives and whispering about cameron's "heaven's gate"... in 1997

it didn't turn out that way. so many teenage girls around the world seeing that movie 10 times in a row. the guy hit one out of the ballpark

but there's another guy who took a dubious premise and knocked one out of the ballpark... and then went even more ambitious and wound up with a career killing flop

i am (ironically, since avatar is, as so many have noted, just dances with wolves in space) talking about kevin costner and his way over budget little personal project called dances with wolves that so many had rejected throughout the 1980s and he staked so much on career-wise

Originally written as a spec script by Michael Blake, it went unsold in the mid-1980s. It was Kevin Costner who, in early 1986 (when he was relatively unknown), encouraged Blake to turn the screenplay into a novel, to improve its chances of being adapted into a film. The novel manuscript of Dances with Wolves was rejected by numerous publishers but finally published in paperback in 1988. As a novel, the rights were purchased by Costner, with an eye to his directing it.[4] Actual filming lasted from July 18 to November 23, 1989. ...

Because of budget overruns and production delays, and after the fiasco of Michael Cimino's Heaven's Gate, then considered one of the most mismanaged Westerns in film history, Costner's project was satirically dubbed "Kevin's Gate" by Hollywood critics and skeptics during the months prior to its release.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dances_with_wolves#Production

then what happened after gaining so much legitimacy in the face of so much doubt? kevin costner followed up with waterworld

gulp

his career was never the same after that flop (even though, personally, i never thought it was a bad movie, it was enjoyable, just somewhat flawed, but not repulsively so)

Problems encountered during filming led to massive budget overrun, and it held the dubious distinction of being the most expensive film ever made at the time. Some critics dubbed it "Fishtar" and "Kevin's Gate" (references to the notorious flops Ishtar and Heaven's Gate).

With a budget of $175 million, the film grossed a mere $88 million at the U.S. box office, which seemed to make it the all time box office bomb.[6] Adjusted for inflation and expressed in 2006 dollars (USD), the budget for the movie was $231.6 million, and grossed $116.8 million at the U.S. box office.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterworld#Box_office_and_reception

so, to conclude

titanic : cameron = dances with wolves : costner

? avatar : cameron = waterworld : costner ?

no man is immune to hubris. avatar may very well be cameron's undoing. but then again, avoid the counsel of anyone who is certain avatar will kill cameron's career. no one knows yet, and anyone who "knows" certainly suffers from the same deadly hubris

Re:All the whiners have is a teaser trailer

[corbettw]

So are we now judging a book by its cover? Thanks but no thanks, I'll wait until I see all the reviews on rottentomatoes before making judgement.

Well now I feel stupid, I was going to wait until seeing it myself before making up my mind. Guess it is easier to cut out the middle man and get my opinions from experts like everyone else. That way, I too can be an individual!

Re:Avatar first-impression:

[kid_oliva]

And what is wrong with hot blue chicks that are slightly feral? I know as I kid I lived the hot green chicks in the Original Star Trek.

Can we now close the marketplace of ideas?

[SlappyBastard]

Because let's just be honest, we're plain out of decent ideas when $200m gets you a thoroughly rehashed plot and a movie with graphics only slightly better than running WoW on 5500FX.

I'm intrigued that no one has mentioned another possible parallel, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Seems like a much more apt comparison considering the game-changing goals are similar.

Re:Can we now close the marketplace of ideas?

[Pollardito]

it reminds me more of the hype around Polar Express "making live actors extraneous." I think that movie made money, but it wasn't exactly game changing

Thirteenth Floor kicked the Matrix movies butt...

[argent]

You'll know the answer to that question when Avatar launches. Think before you type.

Let's see. The Matrix sequels laid a bit of Dan Brown pseudo-philosophy on top of a series of disconnected scenes strung together to show off the special effects. Avatar promises to lay a bit of cyberpunk/videogame explanations on a simplistic story to show off the special effects and set design. What's your point?

Re:Heaven's Gate?

[tverbeek]

Just because you're a toddler with no knowledge of cinema history doesn't mean the rest of us are. I understood the reference immediately. And it's by making occasional reference to things that happened before you were born (such as this) that history is passed down to youngsters (such as yourself). (I'd make an allusion to Logan's Run, but I fear that would sail over your head as well.)

a few thoughts

[stiller]

1) It's James Cameron. Is this still Slashdot? Do I really have to explain who this is and why he deserves some credit?
2) IMAX 3D. It's phenomenal. Really, it is. The Avatar preview was one of the most exciting things I've seen, visually, in a long time. It was like playing Doom for the first time. Or the first time seeing bullet time in the Matrix. And I know what you're going to say, "a good film should be enjoyable on any medium". Sure, enjoyable. But would you say that a Rembrandt is just as enjoyable to watch as a monochrome poststamp reproduction? Or that you'd just as well listen to Pink Floyd over the telephone? No, it would ruin the experience. Cameron has always pushed the envelope both visually and technically. T2 and Aliens were mostly just very well designed and executed remakes of the original, mostly.
3) The plot. Most of us haven't read the screenplay. So we are basing our judgment on a two minute trailer. The premise of "Dances with Wolves" in space doesn't sound exciting, so what? It's exactly that; a premise. Most films are based on a simple premise, it's what you do with it that matters. I personally like the idea of a classic adventure film set it space, but maybe that's me. If you don't like a story about a young man who leaves his home planet to fight with a group of rebels against a technically seemingly superior power by tapping into some mythical power, so be it.
4) The trailer. I actually agree. I don't think it's well done at all. Too much slow-motion, which completely cripples the motion capture performance. After seeing it, I had serious doubts about going to the IMAX screening. I can only say, I'm glad I went.

virtual reality cluster ion late 1990s

[peter303]

Existenze, 13th floor, Matrix-1

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:No not Heaven's Gate ! It's another ABYSS !

[Tarsir]

I've never heard of anyone (prior to you) hating Jar Jar for being a 'realistic' CG character. They hate him because of his silly slapstick humour, or his caricatured portrayal of Jamaicans. In fact, the Star Wars Prequels (with Yoda), and the LOTR Trilogy (with Gollum), are a pretty good indication that fully CG characters can be embraced by audiences.

Well, DUH...

[mblase]

Didn't anyone actually watch the trailer? I don't mean the effects or the monsters, I mean the part where they announce it's from the director of 'Titanic'. Not the director of 'Terminator 2', or 'Aliens', or even 'Abyss'.

In that moment, it became obvious to me they're not targeting it to the sci-fi action crowd. Anyone who thinks they are will doubtless be disappointed.